Opinion: According to Labour Friends of Israel the MPs mentioned over at the right currently have roles in the group.

There is nothing wrong with any British group of people having a foothold in the politics of the country where they live but how far do we go to prove that we are not anti-Semitic and are working towards a two state solution for Palestine and Israel.

Do we have Friends of Russia for example playing a part in British Politics? Do we have Friends of Saudi and or Friends of the USA working within or government?

But looking online there are other groups such as Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East.

But I wonder if this group then includes Gaza, and also Israel again?

"FPME supports Parliamentarians in their efforts to fight for Palestinian rights and independent Palestine by providing briefings for debates and questions for submission to Ministers. We initiate EDMs and debates, organise events and assist with lobbying at all levels. We encourage MPs to take part in Palestine supporting campaigns outside Parliament. LFPME also organises delegations of MPs to visit Palestine to directly engage with Palestinians.

In the end most British voters want a political party working for the good of the country and its citizens. The other stuff is fine but surely secondary?

Now when I ask the following I know some will cry foul and liken me to some sort of nationalist but that is simply not true - Do we have any Labour or Conservative Friends of Britain working in parliament?

This is the list of MP's calling for Ken to be thrown out. Notice any pattern to these names? Anti Semitism should not be tolerated in any facet of society let alone any political party, but this group have sabotaged Labours chances at every turn since JC won his landslide victory. This seems very orchestrated to me in the run up to a major election after making excellent progress in the polls. Of course to claim so will only elicit further jibes about being anti-Semitic.

Op-ed: Thursday Ken Livingstone, 69, was suspended from the Labour Party for comments he made on Hitler.

But before he was suspended he appeared on BBCDP and given the third degree over comments he had said on LBC radio.

He was accused of being a Nazi apologist and an anti Semite. His accuser was Labour MP John Mann and his BBC stunt played out for the cameras.

Between the two events above Livingstone returned home and changed into casual clothes to do some gardening. But outside of his home the media were gathering.

Either answering a knock on his door or hearing a rustle Ken opened the front door and what happened next was caught on camera and in footage.

An Israeli flag had been attached to the front door of his home and most viewers will have been reminded of images from Nazi Germany.

Yes the comparison is poor but it is what it is.

​ITV News caught it all on camera and reported:

Ken Livingstone has been captured on video, coming out of his house to remove an Israeli flag that was tied to his front door.​Dressed in an 'old Labour' t-shirt and braces, the suspended MP, was heard saying "what's this?" as he came out to check if there was someone at his door and instead found a flag attached to the knocker.

Op-ed: OK so first things first. This writer is not racist, sexist, a Nazi sympathiser or an anti-Semite. But using false flags of anti-Semitism is as bad as being an anti-Semite in her opinion. She was one of many who tweeted a range of views and memes during the last Gaza invasion by Israel and stands by that. She is after all supposedly living in a free country and entitled to have opinions and share other opinions at times that she may not agree with.

Once again the BBC Daily Politics featured. Livingstone appeared on the BBCDP and offered some sympathy for Naz Shah and was pounced on by Mann outside of the studio.

But it looks as if Livingstone made the initial comments on LBC and was then invited onto the BBCDP to explain.

Another BBCDP publicity stunt at the expense of the Labour Party.

Livingstone has since been suspended from the Labour Party and Mann faces a reprimand whatever that may be.

An investigation by the Labour Party will follow.

Mr Livingstone was put on the spot by Mann in what looked once again like a carefully crafted BBC stunt.

Of course it warranted first billing on BBC lunchtime news ahead of all other world news Thursday but why? Draw your own conclusions on that one.

All political parties will have some 'ists' somewhere in the pot.

But why is the Labour party suddenly facing such headline making accusations?

Wednesday a Labour MP was suspended and apologised for comments on social media she made in 2014. 2014 was the year that Israel invaded Gaza killing many and social media was used by all sides to share anger and views.

Naz Shah was not an MP in 2014 when she shared a tweet and appeared to add her approval in a comment but it has been enough to draw wide scale mainstream media attention resulting in her suspension from the Labour Party and accusations that she is an anti-Semite.

Mr Livingstone was attacked by Mann for showing some support for Shah; John Mann dramatically for the camera called Livingstone a 'Nazi apologist'.

Ken Livingstone, a former London Mayor and once called Red Ken by the MSM was a thorn in the side of Tony Blair and New Labour. He was removed from the Labour Party but is back in the fold though not widely accepted.

Jeremy Corbyn won the Labour leadership race by a huge mandate but Labour lights that swing to the right are not happy.

Reports of planned coups could simply be right-wing media hype but they seem to have more than a touch of truth to them.

So is the Labour Party now full of anti-Semites or are some in and out of the party spinning a way of attacking and undermining Jeremy Corbyn?

Livingstone has now been suspended from the party but surely John Mann should face a similar fate until investigations are complete? This use and abuse of the BBC is damaging.

Ahead of local elections next week the Tory party is in disarray and Labour could and should do well at the polls.

However with such well publicised spats those wishing to undermine Corbyn even at the expense of election results will be patting each other on the back.

New Labour is dead but some still try to resurrect its corpse and oust Corbyn turning Labour back to another Conservative to centre right wing political party.

Those playing their political games are guaranteeing the Tories electoral success.

Feel free to comment but watch out for Labour's dreadfully named Compliance Unit or perhaps that should be 'thought police'.

Op-ed: Monday an important amendment to the immigration bill was defeated in a vote in the House of Commons.

The amendment would have enabled 3,000 refugee children from camps across Europe entry into the UK.

The amendment was cross-party though tabled by Labour's Lord Dubs, a man who was a Kinder Transport child who came to the UK just ahead of WWII.

The House of Lords agreed to his amendment and so it went to the Commons.

[In March peers in the House of Lords voted 306 votes to 204 in favour of his amendment]

As the ﻿﻿Huffington Post UK﻿﻿reports the Tories used every trick in the book to defeat the amendment in the Commons Monday:

Ministers have been accused of “desperate tactics” to avoid defeat on plans to take 3,000 children from refugee camps in Europe.

Ahead of a crunch Commons vote on accepting the unaccompanied youngsters, it emerged that the Government will deploy a little-used Parliamentary device to quash the plans.

Ministers are set to cite ‘financial privilege’ to force Parliament to dump an amendment to the Immigration Bill that would have forced the Home Office to take in child refugees from Europe.

Labour and the Lib Dems are hoping Tory rebels will back the amendment by Lord Dubs, who was himself rescued from the Nazis by the Kindertransport scheme in the Second World War.

The vote was lost 294 to 276.

You can see the Tories who voted against the amendment over to the right.

There were however abstentions.

Lord Dubs said it was a sad day in British history when the Commons voted down help for vulnerable and unaccompanied refugee children.

The Tories claim they will take an unspecified number of such children from Syria but not from camps in Europe.

The reasoning is that to do so will somehow encourage others to follow a similar route.

The Commons defeat came after Lord Dubs accused the government of “muddying the debate” by announcing last week that the UK would take 3,000 unaccompanied children but only from camps in the Middle East.

Speaking ahead of a Lords debate tonight (Tuesday) on the matter, Lord Dubs told HuffPost UK that taking in the children would honour Britain’s Kindertransport legacy.

When asked whether David Cameron’s government would have saved 10,000 children, including Lords Dubs, the peer said: “It’s a very hypothetical question ... I think this lot wouldn’t have, this lot would’ve probably said no.”

He added “the mood was different” and the Conservative Government of the 1930s may have rejected the Kindertransport if it had abided by “today’s thinking”.He said the Cameron government is “hung up, obsessed” with opposing bringing children from Europe.

“People were more balanced and rational about these things [in the 1930s] at the time,” he said.

“They had long debates in the Commons but in the end they said yes. We took 10,000 ... Other countries said no to the 10,000 ... Even the Americans said no.

﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿The Guardian reports﻿﻿﻿﻿:﻿

The shadow immigration minister, Keir Starmer, has promised that “the fight will go on” to force the UK to do more to help some of the thousands of unaccompanied child refugees stranded in mainland Europe.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday, Starmer said: “We can’t turn our backs on these vulnerable children in Europe, and history will judge us for that.” He added: “It’s not over: the fight will go on.”

He also reacted angrily to the suggestion by some opponents of the proposal that helping children who were already in mainland Europe could create a “pull factor” for others.

James Brokenshire, a Home Office minister, had said in Monday night’s debate that the government could not support a policy that would “inadvertently create a situation in which families see an advantage in sending children alone, ahead and in the hands of traffickers, putting their lives at risk by attempting treacherous sea crossings to Europe which would be the worst of all outcomes”.

So there could still be hope for the children but do not hold your breath.

In 2015 "Sir Nicholas Winton, who organised the rescue of 669 children destined for Nazi concentration camps" died aged 106.

Peers have come up with a plan which they hope will convince MPs in the House of Commons that taking refugee children from camps across Europe is a viable option.

This time they voted for a 'softer option'.

"Peers voted by 279 to 172, a majority of 107, for an amendment to the immigration bill calling on ministers to relocate and support a specified number of children in the UK."

Currently the main sticking point seems to be the country where the unaccompanied, desperate children currently are.

The government wants to only take children from countries they are fleeing and nearby camps. Lord Dubs proposes the UK takes children from refugee camps in Europe also.

Many unaccompanied children are in the worst kind of vulnerable position in European camps. There are reports of rape, abuse and kidnap.

"Nick Baines, the lord bishop of Leeds, told peers that he applauded the government for agreeing to take children directly from the region, but warned that there was an urgent humanitarian need to address the “question on our doorstep”."

Heidi Allen, Tory, abstained in Monday night's vote following her party line although sort of rebelling by opting not to vote down the amendment.

She is hopeful that the amendment will now pass through the commons comfortably.

She said the camp in Calais was “France’s dirty little secret”.

So will MPs in the House of Commons rubber stamp the new amendment to the immigration bill?

Op-ed: Relatives of the 96 killed at the Hillsborough football stadium on April 15, 1989, in court Tuesday listened as a verdict of unlawful killing was returned.

They have taken a slow, long road to justice; it has arrived too late for some but better late than never.

Monday the jury returned their verdict but it was not made public until Tuesday allowing loved ones of the dead time to get to the court from wherever they live.

When the Liverpool football team and their army of fans descended on Sheffield for a match at the Hillsborough stadium in 1989 who would have believed the tragedy that would unfold? This writer watched events unfold on T.V. news before finally the plug was pulled on the harrowing viewing.

96 people died, including children, after crowds surged forward crushing the life out of those trapped behind pitch barriers.

Police blamed the fans and the Sun ran with a damning and fictitious story of drunken football hooligans causing the tragedy.

But the truth was a police officer made a decision to open a gate which caused a huge surge forward crushing many.

Living victims, suffering the effects of being present at such a terrible tragedy, should also be remembered.

Tuesday BBC News reports:

Ninety-six football fans who died as a result of a crush in the Hillsborough disaster were unlawfully killed, the inquests have concluded.

Police failures led to the deaths in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster.

Jurors answered yes to the question about whether any police error caused or contributed to a dangerous situation at the 1989 FA Cup semi-final.

The behaviour of Liverpool fans did not contribute to the dangerous situation at the turnstiles.When the conclusion of the unlawful killing was revealed, families were seen hugging each other in the public gallery and some punched the air.

It was the 25th anniversary of this disaster in 2014 and the families of the dead were still searching for answers. After an apparent police cover up finally new inquests were launched which at last promised the hope of some closure?

Labour shadow Home Secretary Andy Burnham took a different stance fighting long and hard to support the bereaved while pushing for justice.

Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn met with relatives during the recent inquests.

BBC News reports the following key points from the court Tuesday:

Hillsborough fans unlawfully killed, inquests conclude

The jury had to answer 14 questions about the cause of the 1989 disaster in which 96 football fans were fatally injured

Jurors answered yes to the question about whether any police error caused or contributed to a dangerous situation

The behaviour of Liverpool fans did not contribute to the dangerous situation at the turnstiles

CPS confirms it will now begin considering criminal charges over Hillsborough

NOTE:Below is an image of a letter by Bernard Ingham, Margaret Thatcher's press secretary. In the letter addressed to a parent of a victim of the disaster, just months after Hillsborough, Ingham reiterated his belief that the disaster was caused by "tanked up yobs", a view later entirely refuted by the Hillsborough inquest:

According to WikiPedia "Sir Bernard Ingham (born 21 June 1932) is a British journalist and former civil servant who is best known as Margaret Thatcher's chief press secretary while she was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990. He was knighted in Mrs Thatcher's 1990 resignation honours list. Despite never having attended university himself Ingham lectured in public relations at The University of Middlesex. He was also secretary to Supporters of Nuclear Energy (SONE)(1998-2007), a group of individuals who seek to promote Nuclear Power in the United Kingdom and he holds the position of Vice President of Country Guardian, an anti-wind energy campaign group. Ingham is also a regular panellist on BBC current affairs programme Dateline London."

Today there are calls for him to be stripped of his knighthood.

Rupert Murdoch's The Sun also lied.

It posted a series of lies on its front page thanks to editor Kelvin MacKenzie.

Support NEWTEK - Like what we do here at NEWTEK? If so, you should consider supporting us…Running a news based website is fun, time consuming and can be costly. If you would like to help the site keep afloat please use the donate button​